Mass shootings and domestic terrorism have increased dramatically in the U.S. over the past decade for a variety of societal reasons concerned citizens and experts have speculated about. While steps have been taken on the state and federal level to stop this disturbing trend, one unrealized approach that may be effective is to allow law enforcement to intervene in such cases before a potential violent incident occurs.
To this end, the Biden administration has prioritized combating “domestic terrorism”, directing the FBI and other federal agencies to prioritize the tracking of organizations and individuals who target the government or racial, ethnic or religious groups. Many of these organizations are labeled “right-wing” or “hate” groups, and include white supremacists, anarchists and independent militias.
According to the FBI, domestic terrorism “involves acts dangerous to human life” within U.S. borders meant to intimidate civilians or influence government policy. A “domestic violent extremist” is defined as a U.S.-based individual “who seeks to further political or social goals, wholly or in part, through unlawful acts of force or violence”.
The White House’s particular focus on domestic extremism was undoubtedly caused by the events that unfolded at the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 6, 2021. Groups like the Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys, whose members participated in the riots that day, are designated as “white supremacist”, “hate” and “anti-government” groups by the Southern Poverty Law Center and Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation.
The executive branch isn’t the only pillar of government to acknowledge the growing threat of domestic extremism. Democrats in Congress have sounded the alarm and are offering legislative solutions. In November 2022, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, led by Chairman Gary Peters, D-Mich., released a report that found “domestic terrorism” is now a more significant threat to the U.S. than the international variety.
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., also reintroduced legislation in May 2023 to give federal law enforcement agencies jurisdiction over domestic terrorism and direct resources “to the most significant domestic terrorism threats”. The Senate Judiciary Committee, which Sen. Durbin chairs, issued a statement specifically citing “white supremacists” and “militia extremists” as the country’s largest threats.
Congressional Democrats are correct in their labeling of right-wing extremist groups as the most dangerous in terms of domestic terrorism. A study of ideologically-driven murders in the U.S. for 2022 by the Anti-Defamation League found three of the incidents that qualified as mass shootings or murders were committed by individuals motivated by extremely conservative political views. Nine other murders committed by right-wing extremists did not meet the definition of a mass shooting or killing, which leaves 33 other incidents of mass murder not driven by political ideology, according to Gun Violence Archive.
In addition, there were a total of 646 mass shooting incidents in 2022. A “mass shooting” is defined as an event where four or more people are shot and/or killed, not including the shooter. Similarly, the definition of “mass murder” is four or more killed, not including the assailant.
These findings beg the question: What can be done to prevent most mass murders and mass shootings? One solution is to treat all of the above as domestic terrorists. Doing so would give federal law enforcement more investigative leeway when a suspect is designated as engaging in terrorist activity, defined under federal law as “mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping”.
Specifically, Sec. 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act gives authorities the ability to conduct expedited surveillance on suspected cases of “domestic terrorism” as cited by a 2020 study in the journal “Behavioral Sciences of Terrorism and Political Aggression”. However, it seems the federal government has been hesitant to cite the provision, either due to resource constraints or constitutional concerns.
When asked about the use of this law enforcement strategy during his time as U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania in an interview conducted for this article, David Hickton refused to comment.
According to testimony provided by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brad Wiegmann in 2019 as reported by CBS News, however, federal law enforcement can more easily gain judicial authorization to collect evidence on domestic terrorist suspects.
Dr. Lance Hunter, Associate Professor of Political Science at Augusta University, led the 2020 study which found 43% of U.S. mass shootings between 1982 and October 2018 had a “religious, social, ideological, or political motive”.
The same amount of mass shootings met the Global Terrorism Database’s definition of terrorism: “an intentional act of violence”, that has “a political, economic, religious, or social goal”, or “evidence of an intention to coerce, intimidate, or convey some other message to a larger audience other than the immediate victims.”
Some of the most devastating mass shootings in U.S. history such as the Newtown school shooting and the Las Vegas music festival massacre had no known motive at the time of each incident. It has since been learned through FBI investigations the Las Vegas shooter may have been upset merely by gambling related issues, while the Newtown, Conn., elementary school shooting was carried out by a 20-year-old with severe emotional issues.
“I think there has been hesitation to label mass shootings as domestic terrorism when the motivation is unknown, unclear, or appears unrelated to a political, religious or social issue,” Dr. Hunter says.
According to Hickton though, there are many similarities between domestic terrorists and mass shooters who do not espouse a particular ideology. These include, “grievance”, “self-destructive behaviors” and “desire for attention”.
“There is no doubt in my mind there is a confluence between domestic terrorism, including school shootings, and political attacks upon our government”, said Hickton.
“My views on what is needed include a domestic terror statute and enhanced ability to access websites and chat rooms,” he continued. “The most urgent and direct reform needs to be to eliminate the gap in the law which gives comfort to domestic terrorists”.
Editor’s note: The seventh paragraph of this article has been edited to correct the number of mass murders motivated by political ideology.
